Youth Gangs: Causation, Theory, and Strategies
By: Joseph Weber, Advisor – Gary Apperson
Youth gangs have, and continue to be a problem for law enforcement, communities, and families. For decades, gang activity has been rising and law enforcement and the communities have been trying to reduce the violence. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Strain Theory help explain why youths are drawn to the gang life, and why it is difficult to get out. There have been many studies on gang reduction strategies around the country. The Los Angeles Gang Reduction Program, Boston’s Operation Ceasefire, and the Phoenix G.R.E.A.T. program have all been successful in reducing the amount of violence in their communities. Not only do these programs provide after school activities, they teach leadership, provide counseling, and even college preparation classes. Other communities from around the country need to follow in the footsteps of these cities, and use their programs as tools to provide something better for the kids to embrace than gang life.
Introduction
Youth Gangs are responsible for a disproportionate amount of juvenile crime and they continue to frustrate law enforcement efforts, communities, and families. A closer look at the criminological theories may assist in determining youth gang causation and then moving forward to develop strategies for reduction of their formation and criminal activities.This paper will begin by defining specific terms that are relevant to the topic of youth gangs. The next section will provide a brief history of youth gangs. This will be followed by a scope of the problem in terms of gang numbers and crime contributions.The following section will offer a theory framework to account for the existence of gangs and gang formation. Next, this paper examines current law enforcement gang reduction polices and strategies in terms of effectiveness. A discussion section will recommend the most effective gang reduction strategies based on the most current published research follows. Finally, the last section summarizes and concludes the important aspects of gang reduction strategies.
The significance of this paper is that it contributes to the criminal justice system by critically reviewing youth gang policies as they relate to their mission of reducing gang formation and related crime. This paper is written for colleagues and clerisy who have a professional or academic interest in gang reduction policies and strategies.
Terms Defined
There is no universally accepted definition of gangs, which many scholars assert is problematic in the development of gang reduction strategies. Delaney (2006) offers a “lowest common denominator” definition for gangs as groups that are of common purpose involved in criminal activity together. Working forward from Delaney’s definition, youth gangs tend to be in their teens and twenties, align themselves along geographic locations, ethnicity, age range, or other commonalities, and require some degree of permanence (2006). Although the variety of gangs in the U.S. have proven to have groups of various ages from pre-teen to old age, for purposes of the paper on youth gangs, the term “gang” or “gangs” will be meant to be interchangeable with the term youth gangs.
The term “criminal justice system” will be used in this paper to describe the law enforcement agencies used in the prevention and persecution of offenses, including state, local, public and private agencies.
“Communities” will be used to describe the local area that is being affected by the presence of gang activity.
Historical Overview of Youth Gangs
The concern over gang violence in the community is nothing new. Gangs have been terrorizing communities and puzzling the criminal justice system for decades. Jim Myers (2000) from Youth Today States, “It was a scary sign of the times in the mid-1990s: reports that an epidemic of youth gangs was spreading beyond the confines of troubled inner cities.” Gang activity was increasing in the late 1970s and 80s. Myers (2000) stresses that soon after the 1980s, the introduction of high-powered, automatic rifles, and the crack cocaine epidemic facilitated the violence in the gang community to increase exponentially.
Scope of the Gang Problem
The increased usage of firearms have established a positive correlation in elevating the number of deaths related to gang violence. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s National Youth Gang Center conducted a survey on the homicide rates. The purpose of the survey was to enlighten the criminal justice system about the homicide problem caused by gangs. From 1990 through 1995 there were a total of 1,492 gang related homicides reported in the 408 cities that participated (Curry, Maxson & Howell, 2001). The survey continued into the late 1990s and also showed a high level of gang related homicides. Between 1996 and 1998 there was an average of 1,204 homicides per year between 237 cities that reported. The high rate of homicides confirmsa dire need for gang reduction strategies.
Theory Frameworkto Account for Gang Causation
There have been many theories published over the years that attempt to distinguish what makes gangs so attractive to youths. A common criticism is most of thesetheories fail to explain why American youth find gang life so attractive. However, certain aspects of gang causation can be explained within a theory framework.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs can, in part, explain why youth are prone to join gangs. Maslow believed that there are five stages of needs that every human needs to fulfill. Based on Maslow’s construct,Kunc (1992) explains the five stages as: physiological, safety, belonging-love, self-esteem, and self-actualization. Kunc (1992) further explains the gang life can fulfill all five of the stages in a young person’s life. Using Maslow’s construct, Kunc (1992) makes the case that joining a gang fulfills the physiological stage by providing food and shelter. Their safety needs are met by knowing that if anything ever happens, their gang members will protect the member and otherwise retaliate with extreme prejudice. They are given a strong sense of belonging within the gang. As such, their belonging is not based on achievement but based on membership. Kunc (1992) aptly notes, “After passing a one-time initiation ritual, the sense of belonging provided by gangs is extremely close to unconditional.” With this near-unconditionallove, self-esteem and self-actualization naturally flourish. This theory is evidenced in youths that are brought up in very poor communities, possibly with broken families where the youth spends much of his or her time on the streets.
The Anomie-Strain theory as posited by Merton, Alleyne and Wood (2010), and others, recognizes there are outside sources that cause children to be drawn to gang life. Alleyne and Wood (2010) explain the concept of strain theory as a set of goals set by society and society then offers the ability to achieve those goals only to a limited number of people. The inequality that this produces causes a strain on the cultural goals. Alleyne and Wood (2010) forward the construct that this causes anomie, a breakdown in the cultural structure due to a division of cultural norms and the ability for people to act in line with them. Alleyne and Wood (2010, p. 103) assert, “The consequence of anomie is that people adapt to their circumstances byadopting a specific form of behavior.”
This results in groups of people who strike out at society and its standards. The individuals that cannot achieve the goals that are set by society form groups to partake in delinquent behavior. This delinquent behavior becomes the new values for their “society”. If they cannot have the same values as middle class citizens, they will thencreate their own values. Strain theory also accounts for the lack of sufficient educational support for these unstructured youth. Alleyne and Wood (2010) posit that youth that are affected by strain and anomie will feel self-hatred, guilt, loss of self-esteem, and anxiety because the educational system does not have the ability to support those individuals.
This feeling of guilt and loss of self-esteem will draw the youth towards a life of crime and gangs. Both the strain theory and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, in part, support aspects of gang causation. However, these two theories in concert are a viable integrated theory that supports causation and continuation of gangs.
Literature Review of Gang Reduction Programs
The Los Angeles Gang Reduction Program (GRP) was developed just outside of the downtown area of Los Angeles. This site was chosen because of its rich gang history. There are five major gangs that are active in this area, along with many churches and community organizations that are still attempting to battle the gang problem. Cahill and Coggeshall (2008) assert that the LA GRP studied the risk factors that were present in the community in a research survey mode, rather than traditional confrontation methods. These risk factors varied from poor school achievement to high drug use. The LA GRP focused on providing after school and community activities for which the troubled youth of the cities may participate. College prep classes were created for those individuals that were struggling but still wanted to attend college. After school athletic clubs were created for kids attend and be active in a good, healthy way. The LA GRP also gave schools more freedom to offer counseling to students that needed help. Cahill and Coggeshall (2008) reported, “ Los Angeles showed a significant reduction in crime levels, with serious violence, gang related incidents, gang-related serious violence, and citizen reports of shots fired all decreasing after the implementation of GRP there.”
Boston’s Operation Ceasefire is not specifically a “gang reduction program” but an anti-gun initiative. The program is focused on reducing the amount of firearms in the hands of violent individuals. DeMichele and Paparozzi (2008) explain that Operation Ceasefire utilizes ministers, police gang task forces, probation and parole officers and others to proactively search for individuals considered at high risk for possessing firearms. With the combination of problem-oriented policing, gun and drug trafficking crackdowns, and community anti-gang meetings, Operation Ceasefire was a resounding success. Kennedy and Braga (2001) established that after the implementation of Operation Ceasefire, between 1996 and 1998, there was a 63% reduction in monthly youth homicides from 3.5 homicides per month to 1.3. Operation Ceasefire continued to show promising results; a 32% reduction in citywide shots-fired calls, and a 25% reduction in gun assault incidents were reported in the study.
In Phoenix, Arizona the Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) program was designed to help youth avoid gang life. This program, as Henry Sonlheimer (2012) explains, is a school based intervention program. The program was developed in 1991 by the Phoenix Police Department, and was modeled after the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program. The program consisted of 13 in-school lessons with the local police and schoolteachers. The lessons covered what might happen, should the students become involved in gangs. Sonlheiner (2012) established, “The odds of gang membership were 39% lower for students completing G.R.E.A.T.”
Recommendations
Based on the three aforementioned gang reduction programs, several recommendations can be made to help combat the rising gang problem in the United States. The Los Angeles GRP shows that giving the schools more ability to counsel students that are in need can have a dramatic effect on the success of a gang reduction program. Effective counseling is the key to unlocking what the root cause for delinquent behavior is for a child. When that cause is found, a proper program can be created around that child to help facilitate him or her to have a successful life. Prep classes are one of the best things that can be provided for students that may be struggling in school. If a student is struggling and is not being provided assistance, he or she will get discouraged and eventually give up. This is something that is easily fixed by providingmore after school or before school prep and assistance classes for those students looking for a little more help with their education.
The Phoenix G.R.E.A.T. program proves that having a gang reduction program in the schools is a proven effective method to show children the negative consequences of gang life. Having the program in a school setting is ideal because the children are already on site for the lessons, and do not have to rely on a parent or guardian to drop themoff at a different location. Sonlheiner (2012) emphasized that this program has already proven itself; it just needs to be spread to schools around the county so more students can participate.
Current published research indicates youth need legitimate, supervised activities beyond their time in school. After school activities provide a safe place for kids to burn off energy, and learn a sport or activity. Playing a sport builds many skills, including teamwork and respect. It also provides a safe place to play, so the kids are not playing on the streets, where they can be easily introduced into gang life.
Conclusion
Youth gangs have been, and will continue to be a problem in the United States ifreduction strategies are not implemented. Gangs torment communities with violence, and baffle police with new ways to commit crimes. This paper has provided explanations of several programs currently in place around the country that have seen great results based on current research findings. In addition to the programs, it has provided excellent recommendations that could be implemented in schools and communities to help guide children to a gang-free life. Implementing these programs will prove to be instrumental in gang reduction strategies across the nation. They will provide more opportunities for children to stay off the streets, succeed in school, and transition into successful adults. Such strategies are encouraging in reducing violent crime in communities, thus, making them safer for everyone.
References
Alleyne, E., & Wood, J. L. (2010). Gang involvement: psychological and behavioral characteristics of gang members, peripheral youth, and nongang Youth. Aggressive Behavior, 36(6), 423-436.
Cahill, M., Coggeshall, M., Hayeslip, D., Wolf, A., Lagerson, E., Scott, M., et al. (2008, May 29). Community Collaboratives Addressing Youth Gangs: Interim Findings from the Gang Reduction Program. Retrieved May 6, 2014, from
Curry, G. D., Maxson, C., & Howell, J. (2001, March). Youth gang homicides in the 1990's. Retrieved from
Delaney, Tim. (2006).American street gangs. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall
DeMichele, M., & Paparozzi, M. (2008). Community Corrections: A Powerful Field. Corrections Today, 70(5), 68-72.
Kennedy, D., Braga, A., Piehl, A., & Waring, E. (2001, September 1). Reducing gun violence: the Boston gun project's operation ceasefire. . Retrieved May 8, 2014, from
Kunc, N. (1992). The need to belong: rediscovering maslow's hierarchy of needs. Retrieved from
Myers, J. (2000). IS THERE A YOUTH GANG EPIDEMIC?.Education Digest, 66(3), 34.
Sonlheimer, H. G. (2012). Results From a Multi-Site Evaluation of the G.R.E.A.T. Program. Criminal Justice Research Review, 14(1), 6-7.